nitromefandomcom-20200223-history
Forum:Retiring Template:Unnamed
A long time ago, I created a template called Template:Unnamed. It was supposed to be placed on top of pages that are given an unofficial name as they don't have an official Nitrome name. Well, the template soon feel into neglect, never being used. Now, I want to retire it. The reason I want to do this is for multiple reasons: # It looks bad - a big template like that on the top of the page just to say something is unnamed? It doesn't look that good. # It is barely used - we don't use it that much. #It's going to become annoying - probably 80% of all pages on the wiki will bear this template if we begin to use it, and 80% is a lot. Furthermore, the template will become dreadfully annoying to readers. What suggest we do is replace it with a template that only goes on articles that have official names from Nitrome. Thus, articles that don't bear the template will look okay, and there will be very few that do bear this template. -- 17:53, March 23, 2013 (UTC) : While I see NOBODY's points, I think that the template is necessary. ::1. It definately could be more aesthetically pleasing. However, moving the template to the bottom would clear most of that problem up. ::2. It should be used more. Many pages should have it that don't. ::3. It would be annoying--if we put it on all pages with unofficial names. However, placing it on only characters and living objects would also clear up this problem. I am glad this topic has finally come up though. 21:53, March 23, 2013 (UTC) I don't think templates should go at the bottom of pages unless they are navbox templates, Template:Stub or Template:Disambig. I like the idea of addressing the official names rather than the unofficial ones, because it's difficult to decide what if the unnamed template should be used. Like, in the case of a cannon in a game, well, if it fits all the characteristics of a cannon, then it is a cannon, even if the game never says specifically that it is a cannon. You don't need the unnamed template for that. 22:01, March 23, 2013 (UTC) Why do we need a template at all to say whether or not a character or object was actually named by Nitrome? I think that we should just make a citation next to the bolded article's name in the beginning paragraph saying where and when that character or object was named, if it was. -- 22:08, March 23, 2013 (UTC) :Heh. My secondary suggestion is to make it an icon, like the ones that signify a featured article (ex. Mallet Mania). 22:14, March 23, 2013 (UTC) ::I don't know if that would make articles that were named by Nitrome seem more "special" than others, though. Still, cool idea. -- 22:25, March 23, 2013 (UTC) :::How about we take the vanilla idiot proof approach. In te infobox, in small letter after the name, in parentheses, (unofficial name) ::::Seems a bit long to put in the infobox, isn't it? 07:22, April 4, 2013 (UTC) :::::I agree. I still think citations are the best way to go. -- 14:36, April 4, 2013 (UTC) ::::::Not everyone will read the citations for something as insignificant as unofficial name, yes? SQhi•'''(talk)84k edit 15:18, April 4, 2013 (UTC) (Reset indent)All the ideas look interesting, but we have to make something noticeable and not annoying for the readers at the same time. The icons, maybe, aren't enough noticeable, or they aren't the correct place for things like that. The citations aren't enough noticeable neither, and I don't like the above parentheses idea. Anyway, I have no idea of what we could do instead. 16:02, April 4, 2013 (UTC) :Having to use a banner just to tell a reader that a name is unofficial is a waste of space and looks clumsy as well. SQhi•'''(talk)84k edit 16:26, April 4, 2013 (UTC) ::Yeah, maybe being noticeable is not really as important. It's not as if it is imperative that the reader must know that the article they are reading has a official name or not. -- 17:31, April 4, 2013 (UTC) :::Maybe, if being noticeable isn't a problem, we can use . I'll start making the image, just in case we agree with that. 19:42, April 4, 2013 (UTC) ::::The only problem I have with the icon is that it doesn't actually say where the name was officially stated by Nitrome, so that the reader can validate it as well. -- 20:09, April 4, 2013 (UTC) (Reset indent)What about an etymology section, just on pages with official names? 14:30, April 5, 2013 (UTC) :I'm thinking it might be a pretty short section, considering it would just say "Nitrome stated this name here....", but perhaps you meant something different. Could you give an example? -- 14:39, April 5, 2013 (UTC) ---- Resolution Documentation: The issue on this forum was discussed and resolved at User_blog:Random-storykeeper/Collapsible_infoboxes#comm-39161.